Project Lifecycles: Challenges in and Approaches to Process Design from a Psychological Perspective

  • Michael Schneider
  • Monika Wastian
  • Marilyn Kronenberg
Part of the Management for Professionals book series (MANAGPROF)


The purpose of this chapter is to explore useful psychological approaches for process design within the various phases of a project’s lifecycle. The pitfalls encountered during projects will be examined in order to illustrate how project leaders can develop appropriate strategies which they can, in turn, use to make their projects more successful.


Project Team Problem Definition Project Leader Implementation Phase Emotional Competence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Anderson, N., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2004). The routinization of innovation research: A constructively critical review of the state-of-the-science. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 147–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ariely, D., & Wertenbroch, K. (2002). Procrastination, deadlines, and performance: Self-control by precommitment. Psychological Science, 13(3), 219–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Caupin, G., Knoepfel, H., Koch, G., Pannenbäcker, K., Pérez-Polo, F., & Seabury, C. (2006). ICB IPMA competence baseline version 3.0. Nijkerk: IPMA International Project Management Association.Google Scholar
  4. Dornblaser, B. M., Lin, T.-M., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2000). Innovation outcomes, learning, and action loops. In A. H. Van de Ven, H. L. Angle, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Research on the management of innovation. The Minnesota studies (pp. 193–217). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Ford, C., & Sullivan, D. M. (2004). A time for everything: How the timing of novel contributions influences project team outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 279–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gemünden, H. G., & Lechler, T. (1997). Success factors of project management: The critical few. Paper presented at PICMET: Portland international conference on management of engineering and technology, Portland.Google Scholar
  7. von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Müller, R., & Turner, R. (2010). Leadership competency profiles of successful project managers. International Journal of Project Management, 28, 437–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Perlow, L. A. (1999). The time famine: Toward a sociology of work time. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 57–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Project Management Institute. (2008). A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide) (4). Newton Square: Project Management Institute.Google Scholar
  11. Van de Ven, A. H., Polley, D. E., Garud, R., & Venkataraman, S. (1999). The innovation journey. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Wastian, M., & Schneider, M. (2007a). The temporal pattern of innovating: Tracing and understanding innovation stages, their chronological sequence, feedback-loops, and time-lags in innovation processes. Paper presented at the XIIIth European congress of work and organizational psychology, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  13. Wastian, M., & Schneider, M. (2007b). Zeitliche Merkmale von Innovationsprozessen und Projektverläufen – Ansatzpunkte für ein besseres Projektmanagement [Temporal characteristics of innovation and project processes]. In K. Weis (Ed.), Zeitstrategien in Innovationsprozessen. Neue Konzepte einer nachhaltigen Mobilität [Time strategies in innovation processes. New concepts of a sustainable mobility] (pp. 161–178). Wiesbaden: DUV.Google Scholar
  14. West, M. A., & Farr, J. L. (1990). Innovation at work. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies (pp. 3–13). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Schneider
    • 1
  • Monika Wastian
    • 2
  • Marilyn Kronenberg
    • 3
  1. 1.Department for SociologyLudwig-Maximilians-University MunichMunichGermany
  2. 2.Institut für OrganisationspsychologieMunichGermany
  3. 3.Sanofi PasteurParisFrance

Personalised recommendations